QHDM Departures Process

8/15/2019 QHDM Departures Process

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/qhdm-departures-process 1/22

Departures process

Notice:

This document is issued for the sole purpose of stakeholder engagement in advance of a

stakeholder workshop to be held on 18 and 19 June 2013.

The contents of the document are draft and must not be used for any purpose other than

preparation for the said workshop.

Note that the document is a work-in-progress and as such may contain inaccuracies in cross

referencing, table and figure referencing and page numbering. It may also contain rough drafts of

figures and could include inconsistencies and areas of text yet to be developed.





Departures process

Contents

Glossary ................................................................................................................................. 1

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2

1.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 2

1.2 Definitions ............................................................................................................. 2

1.3 Background ........................................................................................................... 3

1.4 Implementation..................................................................................................... 4

1.5 Costs and Benefits ................................................................................................. 4

2 Advice & Procedures ...................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Departures from Standard .................................................................................... 5

2.3 Procedures ............................................................................................................ 5

2.3.1 Step 1 ......................................................................................................... 6

2.3.2 Step 2 ......................................................................................................... 7

2.3.3 Step 3 ......................................................................................................... 7

2.3.4 Step 4 ......................................................................................................... 8

2.3.5 Step 5 ......................................................................................................... 8

2.3.6 Step 6 ......................................................................................................... 8

2.3.7 Step 7 ......................................................................................................... 9

2.3.8 Step 8 ....................................................................................................... 10

2.3.9 Step 9 ....................................................................................................... 10

3 References .................................................................................................................... 13

3.1 General References ............................................................................................. 13

4 Appendices ................................................................................................................... 14

4.1 Appendix 1 .......................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Appendix 2 .......................................................................................................... 17

i



Departures process

Tables

Table 2.3.1: Minimum Level of Information to be Provided by the Applicant ................... 11

Figures

Figure 2.3.1: Procedures Flow Chart ...................................................................................... 6

ii



Departures process

Glossary

To be drafted

Page 1 of 18



Departures process

1 Introduction

1.1 PurposeThis Advice & Procedure Guide is (APG):

• Aimed at personnel involved in the assessment, design and construction

of road projects as well as those involved in the operational management

of road networks including related development control work.• Sets out the procedures to be followed by Design Organizations when

applying for Overseeing Organization consideration of a Qatar Highway

Design Manual Departure from Standard affecting a Freeway,

Expressway, Arterial, Collector or Local road.

• Defines the roles of Overseeing Organization personnel in relation to an

application for a Qatar Highway Design Manual Departure from Standard.

• Specifies a minimum level of information required to be submitted by

Design Organizations when applying for Qatar Highway Design Manual

Departure from Standard.

• Sets out the preferred format to be used by Design Organizations whenapplying for a Qatar Highway Design Manual Departure from Standard.

• Defines the role of the Overseeing Organization in relation to the

approval of a Qatar Highway Design Manual Departure from Standard.

1.2 DefinitionsFor the purposes of this APG the term Overseeing Organization means Ministry

of Municipality and Urban Planning (MMUP) and/or Ashghal.

The term Design Organization refers to any organization undertaking the

design of works that affect the highway network. Such works include private

and public developments.

The Qatar Highway Design Manual is a Qatar Government publication

containing current Standards, and other guidance relating to the design,

operation and improvement of Qatar roads.

The term “Submission” means the documents comprising an application for a

Departure from Standard.

Departure Determination Report (DDR) -presents the analysis of the proposedDeparture from Standard together with the recommendations as to whether or

Page 2 of 18



Departures process

not the Departure should be approved. The DDR also sets out any

compensatory measures that are considered essential to mitigate the effects of

the proposed Departure.

The Departure Determination represents the Overseeing Organization’s formal

approval or rejection of the Design Organization’s application for a Departure

from Standard. The Departure Determination includes any essential

compensatory measures to mitigate the effects of the proposed Departure.

1.3 BackgroundAs part of the design process a Design Organization may identify one or more

Departures from Standard that would avoid engineering or environmental

problems arising as a result of the project. Such problems would normally beexpected to involve either high construction costs or large environmental

impacts. Before incorporating a Departure from Standard into the works, the

Design Organization must seek the approval of the Overseeing Organization.

Within the current Qatar Government structure, MMUP/Ashghal is responsible

for approval or rejection of applications for Qatar Highway Design Manual

Departures from Standard.

The Overseeing Organization has a duty of care in considering an application

for a Departure from Standard. In the event of a Fatal Accident Inquiry or in

defense of litigation arising from an accident or other loss in which a Departure

from Standard is cited as a material consideration, the Qatar Government

needs to be able to demonstrate that its actions were fair and reasonable and

that due diligence was applied in the determination of the Departure. For this

reason, the DDR and Determination are retained by the Qatar Government for

a minimum period of 30 years following implementation of the Departure from

Standard.

It is of course the responsibility of the Design Organization to identify all

Departures from Standard and to submit these to the Overseeing Organization

for approval. Early submission is advised. In any case applications must be

determined prior to incorporating the Departure into the works. A Departure

from Standard cannot and will not be determined after it has been

incorporated into the works. As a result expensive remedial measures may be

required in order to either ensure that the works conform to the required

Standard or to make appropriate arrangements for loss of benefits or future

liabilities including enhanced maintenance regimes, etc.

This APG advises MMUP/Ashghal and Design Organization personnel as to the

timing of applications and the information required to be included in the

submission. It also informs as to the role of MMUP/Ashghal Standards Manager

in the analyses and determination of an application for a Departure fromStandard. Both MMUP/Ashghal and Design Organization personnel will be held

Page 3 of 18



Departures process

accountable as regards the application of this APG to permanent works which,

by their nature, are required to comply with Qatar Highway Design Manual

Standards.

1.4 ImplementationThis APG is to be implemented with effect from the date of signature (see front

cover). From that date it shall apply to all personnel of the MMUP/Ashghal and

its successor organization(s). This APG is to be freely distributed externally.

1.5 Costs and BenefitsWith a view to making due allowance in forward estimates, project managers

may wish to take account of the cost implications of applying the advice and/or

procedures in this APG. They may also wish to be aware of the anticipated

benefits deriving from the advice and procedures contained in this APG. The

anticipated costs arising from the implementation of this APG are:

• MMUP/Ashghal staff direct running costs.

• Design Organization costs in preparing Submissions.

• The anticipated benefits to be derived from the implementation of this

APG are:

• This APG draws together existing advice on Submissions into one

coherent reference document making the Departure Determination

process more efficient and cost effective.

• This APG confirms the procedures to be followed by Design Organization

and MMUP/Ashghal personnel and highlights the requirement for early

identification of Departures from Standard in order to reduce the

potential need for expensive design changes and remedial measures etc.

• Definition of the minimum level of information to be submitted by Design

Organizations should reduce delay in providing Departure

Determinations and ensure that the Determination process is more

efficient and cost effective.

• Definition of a preferred format for Submissions enables completion of

the DDR and the final Departure Determination thus minimizing the work

to be undertaken.

• Clarification of the roles of MMUP/Ashghal will enable an improved level

of service to be provided which will result in better value for money.

• The avoidance or minimization of potentially expensive litigation through

the adoption of improved procedures.

Page 4 of 18



Departures process

2 Advice & Procedures

2.1 IntroductionThe QHDM embodies the joint experience of the Overseeing Organization,

their agents, design organizations and contractors over many years. It

represents best practice in the design, operation and improvement of

freeways, expressways, arterials, collectors and local access roads. In this

regard, the QHDM is continuously reviewed and developed with the objectivesof improving road safety, reducing environmental impact and increasing value

for money.

QHDM Standards are prepared by appropriately qualified and experienced

professional staff and are widely consulted upon prior to incorporation.

Although they do not exhaustively cover every aspect of design, the technical

requirements given in the Manual must be adhered to for freeways,

expressways, arterials, collectors and local access roads unless approval to

incorporate a Departure from Standard has been given by the Overseeing

Organization.

2.2 Departures from StandardThe Design Organization shall prepare a submission as and when circumstances

arise that the application of the technical requirements of a QHDM Standard

appears to the Design Organization to give rise to a disproportionate

construction cost or environmental impact.

The procedures to be followed when preparing the submission and the roles of

the Design Organization, Project Manager and Overseeing Organization are

discussed below.

2.3 ProceduresHighway designers occasionally identify circumstances where a Departure from

Standard would overcome engineering and/or environmental problems and

avoid large construction costs or major environmental impacts arising within a

project. Before incorporating the Departure from Standard into the specific

project the Design Organization must seek authorization from MMUP/Ashghal

in its capacity as QHDM Overseeing Organization. The 9 step Submission

process that must be followed is presented in the following paragraphs andsummarized in Figure 2.3.1.

Page 5 of 18



Departures process

Figure 2.3.1: Procedures Flow Chart

2.3.1 Step 1The Standards contained in QHDM represent maximum and/or minimum levels

of provision that, under the normal range of operating conditions currently

experienced; give satisfactory levels of performance in terms of the

construction, operation and maintenance of a road. However, a proposal for a

Page 6 of 18





Departures process

• that the level of information supplied complies with Table 2.3.1

requirements;

• that the Departure(s) proposed is acceptable in principle to the

MMUP/Ashghal Project Team;

• that the Departure(s) proposed complies with the route strategy for the

highway under improvement, applies to new design and improvements

to existing roads.

• If the MMUP/Ashghal Project Manager considers that the Submission is

lacking important detail or that the Departure(s) proposed is

unacceptable, then the MMUP/Ashghal Project Manager will reject the

Submission and return it to the Design Organization with the reasons for

the rejection.

2.3.4 Step 4Once the MMUP/Ashghal Project Manager is satisfied that the Submission is

acceptable, two copies of the Submission including relevant drawings and

background information are to be passed to MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch.

On receiving the Submission, MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch will undertake

a review of the nature of the Departure(s).

2.3.5 Step 5On receiving the Submission the MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch will

undertake an initial review of the documents to confirm that the standard

submission has been used and to establish whether or not any additionalinformation is required beyond that set out in Table 2.3.1.

If additional information is required, the MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch

shall contact the Design Organization directly but will normally advise

MMUP/Ashghal Project Manager in advance that contact is to be made. In turn

STE Branch will discuss this with the SE Project Manager. The Standards Branch

shall keep MMUP/Ashghal Project Manager fully informed of any potential

impact on the project that may result from any additional information required

or received.

Depending on the nature of the Submission a site visit by Standards Branch

may be required. Site visits will normally be undertaken by the MMUP/Ashghal

Standards Branch acting alone and independently. However, members of the

Design Organization and MMUP/Ashghal Project Team may occasionally

become involved in a site meeting.

2.3.6 Step 6Once the MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch is satisfied that all of the necessary

information is to hand, including specific site details, the proposed

Departure(s) will be analyzed against the relevant QHDM Standard(s). Due to

the varying nature of Departures, their interaction with each other and existing

and future route conditions, each Departure is unique. Therefore, there are no

Page 8 of 18



Departures process

rigid criteria as to whether a particular Departure is acceptable or not.

However, the following would normally be among the factors considered

during assessment:

• there shall be, at least, either a calculable large cost saving or an

assessable large environmental benefit to be gained from the proposed

Departure;

• the incorporation of the Departure into the scheme shall not introduce a

discontinuity into the route in terms of its current and known future

strategy; e.g. future operational performance requirements;

• the incorporation of the Departure into the final construction works shall

not result in a road that is ambiguous to users or potential users in terms

of the static presentation of the route and its interpretation by users

under dynamic conditions. The assessment of this factor will take accountof the normal range of operating conditions that users can be expected

to encounter (daily and seasonal light and weather conditions etc.);

• any significant increase in risk to any user or potential user of the route

as a result of the incorporation of the Departure into the works must be

capable of mitigation.

2.3.7 Step 7On completion of the evaluation process the MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch

will prepare a Departure Determination Report (DDR) which will include each

of the following:

• reference to the applicant’s Submission and all supporting

documentation, and

• A draft Departure Determination (Refer to Appendix 2) incorporating

MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch recommendations as regards approval

or rejection of the application. This will include details of the Departure

and any recommended adjustments to the design considered practicable

and desirable. Also included will be the MMUP/Ashghal Standard

Branch’s views on essential compensatory measures to mitigate any

significant increase in risk to any user or potential user of the route as aresult of the incorporation of the Departure into the works. This may

include input to the subsequent Safety Audit process.

• In undertaking the assessment the MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch will

consider the cost and environmental savings calculated and assessed by

the Design Organization against any increased accident risk but also in

absolute terms against the current calculated social costs of a slight,

serious or fatal accident and against the scale of the new or improved

road. Considerations will take account of Overseeing Organization policy

together with experience of the operational characteristics of similar

design elements elsewhere. It will ensure consistency in terms of theDetermination of Departures where competing designs are involved and

Page 9 of 18



Departures process

will take account of the known effectiveness of any recommended

compensatory measures. The scope for further mitigation through the

Safety Audit process will also be considered. A final holistic view of the

Departure will be taken against the Overseeing Organization’s duty ofcare.

2.3.8 Step 8MMUP/Ashghal Standards Branch will forward a copy of the final Departure

Determination to MMUP/Ashghal Scheme Project Manager concerned. Copies

of Determinations that incorporate rejections that may have implications for

other highway programmes will be circulated to ensure consistency of

approach.

2.3.9 Step 9The MMUP/Ashghal Scheme Project Manager will forward the Departure

Determination to the Design Organization.

If a Departure has been approved then the Design Organization may proceed to

incorporate the Departure within the design together with all essential

compensatory measures specified in the Departure Determination and include

details of the Departure in the Road Safety Audit Brief.

If a Departure has been rejected then the project must not be progressed with

the Departure included.

Insofar as rejection of a particular Departure adversely affects the feasibility of

a trunk road scheme the MMUP/Ashghal Scheme Project Manager will advise

the Design Organization as to how the scheme is to be taken forward.

Page 10 of 18



Departures process

Table 2.3.1: Minimum Level of Information to be Provided by the Applicant

Heading Submission Requirements

Project Details • A general description of the project.

• A statement of the Route Strategy and a

description of the road’s context, including

contiguous affected adjacent sections of

road(s) in a 2-3km range.

• Road Type and Category.

• The existing and proposed carriageway cross-

section.

• The calculated Design Speed of the road under

review.• High and low growth or central traffic flows at

year of opening and design year 15 where

different (Including traffic composition, turning

movements and any assumptions made with

respect to traffic growth factors used).

Departure Description • 1:10,000 location plan showing the extent of

the project, the location of all proposed and

existing Departures and any other related

features.

• Appropriate drawings of the proposed

Departure and its approaches, including a plan

and profile at a scale not less than 1:2500 for

the mainline and 1:500 for junctions.

• A plot of available visibility against chainage

(where appropriate).

• Relate the proposed Departure to the Desirable

Minimum Standard, with reference to the

appropriate section(s) of QHDM.

• Identify any other proposed or existing

Departures and Relaxations that may affect the

same or related design elements.

Page 11 of 18



Departures process

Heading Submission Requirements

Justification • Provide a detailed justification for the proposed

Departure (i.e. economic, environmental orother savings).

• Details of alternative solutions investigated

that were dismissed in favor of the proposed

Departure (including a compliant design).

• State the cost differentials between the

adopted solution and any alternatives

considered (e.g. difference in capital costs;

maintenance costs; vehicle operating costs,

accident costs and other user

benefits/disbenefits).• The effects, if any, that the Departure may

have on the environment (in terms of humans,

flora, fauna, soil, water, air, climate, landscape,

cultural heritage etc.) compared to any

alternatives considered.

Safety Implications • Describe and quantify where possible the likely

effects of the proposed Departure on the

safety of the road user:

• Where any significant safety hazard mightoccur undertake a risk assessment taking

account of all relevant user categories.

• Where appropriate the last three years

accident records.

Structural Integrity • Where appropriate provide details of any

possible impact the proposed Departure may

have with respect to the structural

integrity/stability of earthworks, structures and

road pavement.

Essential Compensatory

Measures

• Identify compensatory measures considered

necessary or advisable to mitigate the adverse

effects of the proposed Departure (e.g.

adjustments to geometry; use of upgraded

materials (e.g. high friction surfacing);

improved traffic signs and road markings;

enforcement measures (e.g. speed cameras);

statutory measures (e.g. speed restrictions

etc.).

Page 12 of 18



Departures process

3 References

3.1 General ReferencesNone used unless this is overwritten.

Page 13 of 18



Departures process

4 Appendices

4.1 Appendix 1Preferred layout for the applicant’s Submission.

The applicant shall submit the application for Departure(s) from Standard in

accordance with the format overleaf.

Page 14 of 18



Departures process

Ministry for Municipal and Urban Planning and Ashghal

Submission for QHDM Departure from Standards

APPLICANT:

PROJECT TITLE:DEPARTURE NO :

PROJECT DETAILS

General description of

project

[Realignment, new road, value added maintenance etc.]

Route Strategy [Details of MMUP/Ashghal’s current strategy with respect to

the route affected by the proposed Departure from

Standard. Applicants should seek guidance from the relevantMMUP/Ashghal Scheme Project Manager where necessary]

Road Category & Type [Refer to QHDM, Table ?]

Proposed Carriageway

Cross Section

[Carriageway, lane, verge, central reserve, footpath widths

etc.]

Design Speed Proposed [Add Design Speed identified in accordance with QHDM]

Future Traffic Flows &

Composition

[Refer to Table 2.3.1:Project Details for requirements]

DESCRIPTION OF

DEPARTURE

Location and Chainage [e.g. Junction of A8000/B8000, CH 1000 to CH 1050]

Departure Type [e.g. Stopping Sight Distance]

QHDM Reference [QHDM Section. Part paragraph No.]

Required Standard [Identify Desirable Minimum Standard]

Standard Provided [Identify Standard being provided and how it relates to the

Desirable Minimum Standard]

Associated Departures or

Relaxations

[Identify any other Departures or Relaxations included

within the proposed project that interact with the Departure

being considered]

Drawing Nos. [Add Drawing Reference Numbers. Refer to Table 2.3.1for

the minimum No./scale of Drawings to be provided]

JUSTIFICATION

Page 15 of 18



Departures process

DESCRIPTION OF

DEPARTURE

Detailed Justification [Refer to Table 2.3.1: Justification for requirements]

Safety Implications [Refer to Table 2.3.1:Safety Implications for requirements]

Structural Integrity [Refer to Table 2.3.1: Structural Integrity for requirements]

ESSENTIAL

COMPENSATORY

MEASURES

Compensatory Measures [Refer to Table 2.3.1: Essential Compensatory Measures forrequirements]

APPLICANT’S NAME

DATE

Page 16 of 18



Departures process

4.2 Appendix 2Standard layout for Draft Departure Determination Table.

SPECIMEN

TITLE OF HIGHWAY

TITLE OF PROJECT

QHDM DEPARTURE DETERMINATION

DRAFT

Page 17 of 18



Departures process

QHDM DEPARTURE DETERMINATION: Project Title

Departure

Reference

Location and

Description

Approved

/Rejected

Comments / Mitigation /

Essential CompensatoryMeasures

1 Ch 1000 to 1050 Proposed

Vertical Crest Curve k = 9

on the immediate

approach to roundabout

(Represents 5 design

speed steps below

Desirable Minimum k =

100).

Sub-standard Vertical

Crest Curve produces a

SSD of approximately 60m

to the low object height

on the southbound

approach to the

roundabout (Compared to

the Desirable Minimum

SSD for 100kph Design

Speed of 215m).

Rejected The proposed Crest Curve is

rejected on safety grounds. A SSD

of approximately 60m is deemed to

be of insufficient length to ensure

that the road user would not either

overshoot the ‘Give Way’ line or

impact with queuing vehicles.

The applicant should investigate

how the SSD on the southern

approach may be improved whilst

maintaining a reasonable gradient

away from the roundabout. An ‘off-

line’ solution or an alternative

junction location may be required.

Prior to any future Submission the

applicant should undertake speed

measurements to identify the

correct Design Speed to be applied.

2 Provision of footways

within the visibility

envelope to the ‘Give

Way’ line on the

southbound and Arterial

Road approaches.

No

Departure

Although it is desirable to avoid

footways being provided within the

visibility envelope it does not

constitute a Departure from

Standards. (Refer ????). The

applicant should ensure that

detailed design minimizes the

effect of pedestrians on visibility

envelopes.

Documents

QHDM Departures Process